Dellucci TailGator wrote:I love that of all the players a guy could have a vendetta against, he picked Drew Stubbs.

I have no vendetta against Stubbs. I really hope he's great. I simply looked at Drew Stubbs' batting statistics in 2011 and Drew Stubbs' batting statistics in 2012 playing in a very hitter friendly park and was aghast at what I saw. I look on these boards and read about how unbelievable this offense is going to be this year, and I can only chuckle when looking at Drew Stubbs' stats in 2011 and 2012 hitting a baseball or attempting to hit a baseball. I've got a cousin telling me how great our OUTFIELD defense is going to be like that is suddenly an incredibly important metric to determine team success.

I won't bash the guy any longer. I will simply accept the last two full seasons were simply an anomoly for Stubbs and go merrily on my way. I guess I'm just old and jaded now, I get no benefit convincing myself this guy is good. I'm simply responding to people being excited about this guy by looking at statistics of what he's done. Evidently my problem in looking at Stubbs is the fact that I still accept the fact that right handed pitchers are still allowed to play major league baseball. But then I look at our roster and see a guy named Ubaldo Jimenez on it so I actually know right handed pitchers are still allowed to play major league baseball, so you can see where I am having problems here.

That should work fine. If you happen to find something better, cool. But don't lose any sleep looking.

Not sure who you're looking for, but I can tell you Shelly Duncan vs. any type of breaking ball is close to .000. And that is the combined average of "one knee down" and standard.

No worries. That gets negated by his 1.000 on fastballs on the inner half up 2-0 in the count, trailing by 12 in the 9th.

Not so fast. Fastballs on the inner half should be divided between 92mph fastballs and fastballs at 95+ with anything on them. Because Shelley ain't touching the latter ones too often either.

You are correct. My assumption with the scenario presented was no matter who was throwing it it would qualify as "get-me-over" and taking a little off.

So we'll need the data that includes the GMO/TALO category of fastballs. Fangraphs have that so that we can scientifically conclude Duncan is a beast on the GMO/TALO in low-pressure late innings of a route?

(*) I think I've mentioned this before in discussions on Pitch FX, but full disclosure: A friend of mine wrote the software that ESPN uses to generate these heat maps. Essentially, you select a player and choose as many or as few criteria as you want, and it will create a heat map showing hot and cold zones, with (if needed) numbers showing what "hot" and "cold" represent. I know I've brought this up in previous stats / scouts discussions, but this kind of data is why I think that in the long-run stats and scouts will essentially merge at the major league level.

Best I can tell you about Duncan is that, over his career, according to Pitch F/X data, he is 6.3 runs below an average hitter against four-seam and unclassified fastballs, which is .49 runs below average per every 100 fastballs. It's the slider that he has struggled the most with in his career.

A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe

scrambler wrote:I've got a cousin telling me how great our OUTFIELD defense is going to be like that is suddenly an incredibly important metric to determine team success.

In terms of defensive runs saved by outfields, four of the 10 playoff teams were above 0. The Braves led all of baseball, the Athletics were 5th, the Giants were 9th, and the Cardinals were 14th.

Five teams in the bottom 11 in the league, the Reds (-13, t-20th) the Tigers (-13, t-20th) the Yankees (-18, 25th), the Nationals (-20, 27th), and the Orioles (-23, 29th) made the playoffs.

So, using that one stat in a vacuum, no, it isn't an incredibly important metric to determine team success. But, those teams were all in the top half of baseball in runs scored. The Reds, Nats, Tigers, Cardinals, Giants, Athletics, and Braves were all in the top 10 in starter ERA.

Anywhere the Indians can gain an advantage with their starting rotation helps their chances that much more. I don't see how having a good defensive outfield can be a bad thing.

A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe

skatingtripods wrote: I don't see how having a good defensive outfield can be a bad thing.

I think (and I'm not 100% sure) the point scrambler is making is that on a high percentage of balls in play the OF defense doesn't matter and that you're better off trading excellent OF defense for excellent offensive production.

Taking it to an extreme, if you had an OF of Stubbs, Stubbs and Stubbs you'd be pretty solid defensively, no?

But would you be better off than if you had Miguel Cabrera, Pujols and Fileder from left to right?

I think that's how having a good defensive OF can hurt. Because those guys out there ultimately have to hit.

I think that's the basic point anyway. And yes, I realize the example is ridiculous.

I also know you can't look at it in that kind of vacuum. To say this OF isn't better offensively and defensively combined than last season's OF would be unfairt and disengenuous as well. It is better both ways IMO.

peeker643 wrote:I think (and I'm not 100% sure) the point scrambler is making is that on a high percentage of balls in play the OF defense doesn't matter and that you're better off trading excellent OF defense for excellent offensive production.

Taking it to an extreme, if you had an OF of Stubbs, Stubbs and Stubbs you'd be pretty solid defensively, no?

But would you be better off than if you had Miguel Cabrera, Pujols and Fileder from left to right?

I think that's how having a good defensive OF can hurt. Because those guys out there ultimately have to hit.

I think that's the basic point anyway. And yes, I realize the example is ridiculous.

I also know you can't look at it in that kind of vacuum. To say this OF isn't better offensively and defensively combined than last season's OF would be unfairt and disengenuous as well. It is better both ways IMO.

It's hard to come up with an exact number of fly balls that are catchable, so it's not really something I can quantify. Some line drives are outs. Most fly balls are outs, though some are infield popups. So, it's not necessarily a bad point to make. Also impossible to ascertain balls cut off down lines and in gaps that turn doubles into singles.

But on offensive output, we're getting well above average production from our C, should get above average production from 1B, 2B, SS. Probably around league average from LF and CF. Below average from RF when Stubbs is out there. Reynolds should be around league average at DH.

If Stubbs was left handed and his platoon splits were against RHP, I don't think we'd be having this discussion. Unfortunately, you face a RHP a lot more than a LHP, which negates Stubbs's platoon advantage there. In his career, Stubbs has been 20% better than an average player against LHP, while Choo has been 4% worse than an average player. But, Choo is 48% better than average against RHP, while Stubbs is 23% worse.

We'll see how much Stubbs actually plays against RHP. If Giambi makes the team, I don't think Stubbs plays a lot. This may end up being a non-issue and Stubbs would be a late inning defensive replacement/pinch runner against RHP.

Getting Stubbs out of GABP will help his defensive metrics too. Anything hit over his head in Cincinnati is a home run. So, that will increase his value.

Ultimately, I don't think Stubbs will be a big hindrance to the team. Batting 9th and being useful around 30% of the time at the plate should be enough to keep his defense close to full value.

A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe

skatingtripods wrote: I don't see how having a good defensive outfield can be a bad thing.

I think (and I'm not 100% sure) the point scrambler is making is that on a high percentage of balls in play the OF defense doesn't matter and that you're better off trading excellent OF defense for excellent offensive production.

Taking it to an extreme, if you had an OF of Stubbs, Stubbs and Stubbs you'd be pretty solid defensively, no?

But would you be better off than if you had Miguel Cabrera, Pujols and Fileder from left to right?

I think that's how having a good defensive OF can hurt. Because those guys out there ultimately have to hit.

I think that's the basic point anyway. And yes, I realize the example is ridiculous.

I also know you can't look at it in that kind of vacuum. To say this OF isn't better offensively and defensively combined than last season's OF would be unfairt and disengenuous as well. It is better both ways IMO.

I'll give it is better defensively. On offense you go from Brantley to Brantley...I guess you have to assume he improves again this year. You go from Stubbs to Choo...you lose a ton there offensively....even drunk driving messed up Choo in 2011 was better offensively. They you have Bourn replacing whatever disaster we put in left field last year, that will be a big improvement offensively. It's all estimates on what they do in 2013, but I honestly don't think it's a big improvement offensively this year. Brantley is Brantley....what Stubbs did in 2012 pretty much equals what our sad state was in left in 2012...yeah that bad, and is Bourn really better than Choo on offense?? I would say the opposite and Choo is better on offense than Bourn.

If we get the 2010 Stubbs, it will be a big improvement on offense...if we get the 2012 Stubbs it will be a minimal offensive improvement if even that. I hope everyone is right and the guy reverses this two year sharp downward trend. I'm glad people know something that I don't know about what will happen this year. I understand Bauer was the real target of the Choo trade and Stubbs was simply a throw in for the most part, so I am much more interested in what Bauer does than Stubbs.

I remember about 4 years ago when Seattle was gonna revolutionize the game because they uncovered the "undervalued" flavor of the month - defensive guy.

All kinds of metrics showing this and that.

Might a just went out and found some guys that can PLAY.

Yeah, having a good defensive outfield is better than having a poor one I suppose.

But having a good outfield is better than having a good defensive outfield - pre or post advanced stat.

Look, if you don't get serious production from a couple of your outfield spots, you're in pretty deep shit if you wanna have a good offense. And in order to make it up you'd need some studs mashing in other spots of the line-up. Not crossing your fingers with Chiz or hoping Santana blossoms - I'm talkin' guys you can COUNT on to produce. Stars.

And as it sits now you're gonna have Bourn at the top, Brantley 5th, and Swish somewheres in between. Catch Smatch. Those guys better HIT.

The team is better than last year. Would it be better if they had signed Hamilton in right as opposed to Stubbs? Of course, but I am happy because this IMO is the first season in a long time that you can see where they actually did something to actually improve the team.

Will the outfield offense be better than last year? Maybe not, but it's not going to be worse and the defense will be better so that is a plus.

Is the infield offense and defense better? One has to say that based upon reasonable expectations, it clearly will.

Does the starting pitching do better this year? Right now it's the big question but I can't see them being any worse. So worse case is that they do not lose over 90 games again. Best case is that they are better than last year and we will see where that takes them.

leadpipe wrote:I remember about 4 years ago when Seattle was gonna revolutionize the game because they uncovered the "undervalued" flavor of the month - defensive guy.

And Franklin Gutierrez thanks them several million times over.

I think when teams look for these 'hidden' metrics to gain an edge, they do so with the knowledge that you still need 'playas' on your team to win. Moneyball emphasized OBP, but a team full of Scott Hattebergs wouldn't have won much without that pitching staff Oakland had, or Miguel Tejada anchoring the middle of the lineup.

What advanced statistics tries to do is find upgrades throughout the lineup that will have a cumulative effect. You don't stop bringing in guys who can mash or flame-throwing pitchers, but you do look for guys who have up-ticks in certain statistical categories as a way to improve the over-all lineup. Having a guy who is a solid hitter is nice. Having a guy who is the offensive equivalent but is a superior defensive player is better. It's not about replacing Josh Hamilton with Drew Stubbs...